This excerpt
illustrates the commitment that many child advocates and policy-makers
shared to keeping unmarried birth
mothers and their babies together in the early decades of the
twentieth century, even as it suggests the shame associated with
illegitimacy. It also illustrates
the combination of science, sympathy, and legal regulation that
defined “social case work,” the approach embraced by
the new profession of social
work.
Of all problems in domestic relations with which the social worker
deals, that of the family unsanctioned by Church or State, unrecognized
by the community, is probably the most difficult. Although we speak
usually of the “unmarried mother” and the “illegitimate
child,” nevertheless the situation involves all the elements
of a family group—mother, father, and child. Each of these
has certain rights, the parents have certain obligations, and the
relationship of the members of the group to the community must also
be given consideration.
“Every child has the right to be born with honor, and his
birth should not be an obstacle to the fullest and highest development
of his life and his social activities,” is the opening clause
of the “Code of the Rights of Children,” adopted in
November, 1924, by the First International Congress of Social Economy,
in session in Buenos Aires, Argentina, and in January, 1925, by
the Third Pan-American Scientific Congress, in session in Lima,
Peru. Thus “nobody’s child” of the English common
law and the child who under the Code Napoleon was denied knowledge
of his paternity, is, by the unanimous declaration of two international
gatherings, declared entitled to the fullest opportunities, regardless
of the circumstances of his birth. Humiliation and ostracism, those
ancient weapons used by society in defense of the sanctity of the
home and the family, are not to be employed against the innocent
child.
The students of social relationships will take exception to such
a proposition, but how is the ideal to be put into practice? How
is the child to be safeguarded from social censure, from the deprivation
of paternal love, care and support, and be given those things which
are essential to a normal, happy childhood? The answers to these
questions can be developed only by the slow, painstaking processes
involved in what we call “social case work,” and by
the gradual education of the public to a more just attitude toward
the problem of illegitimacy.
The girl who becomes a mother out of wedlock is in a pathetically
large proportion of cases a child herself. In various studies it
has been found that from one-ninth to nearly one-fourth of such
mothers are under 18 years of age. Her delinquency, made extremely
difficult to conceal because of her maternity, is of the kind punished
most drastically by society, and the girl fears not only suffering
for herself but shame and humiliation for her loved ones. She is
town between the maternal instinct to love and care for her child,
and the instinct of self-preservation which prompts her to conceal
her trouble from the community and perhaps even from her own parents.
She is usually in need of physical care, of financial assistance,
of social adjustment, of vocational guidance, and of help in stabilizing
her emotional life and strengthening her spiritual resources. If
the girl is of subnormal mentality, she is doubly in need of protection
and guidance.
Steady progress is being made in the development of methods of
dealing with the unmarried mother and her child, but the problem
of the unmarried father has been given comparatively little attention.
The father’s responsibility toward his child is primarily
financial, as the mother’s is primarily for physical care. . . .
A baby’s first need is for his mother and his chances for
life depend to a large extent on the meeting of this need. Infants
born out of wedlock have been found by the U.S. Children’s
Bureau to be subject to a mortality rate almost three times as high
as that for infants of legitimate birth. For example, in Baltimore
in 1915 it was found that almost one-third of the babies born out
of wedlock died before the age of one year. The early separation
of mother and child, with the consequent feeding difficulties is
perhaps the most important factor in this high mortality. A study
of illegitimacy made in Milwaukee covering the year ending September
30, 1917, showed that more than half the children included in the
study had been separated from their mothers and that in 45 per cent
of these cases the separation had taken place within a month after
birth. Studies made in Baltimore following the report of the Maryland
State-wide Vice Commission in 1914 revealed the seriousness of the
problem of early separation form their mothers of infants born out
of wedlock and the high mortality prevailing among babies cared
for in institutions apart from their mothers.
Maryland public sentiment was aroused and in 1916 a statute was
enacted providing that no child under 6 months may be separated
from its mother for placement in a foster home or institution. . . .
The Milwaukee program for keeping mothers and babies together during
a three-months nursing period was put into effect in 1919. In the
two-year period, 1916 and 1917, the mortality rate in Milwaukee
for infants born out of wedlock was 256.8, or 2.5 times the rate
for children of legitimate birth. The executive secretary of the
Juvenile Protective Association, in describing the results of Milwaukee’s
program for unmarried mothers and babies after the program had been
two years in operation, comments as follows: “The results
of these measures have been gratifying and far-reaching. The child-placing
organizations, and the doctors and other individuals who formerly
brought many babies a few days old into the city to be placed for
adoption, are now required to have permits to board them until they
are placed with adoptive parents. Commercial lying-in hospitals
and maternity homes, which formerly permitted mothers to leave when
their babies were only 10 days or 2 weeks old, without any effort
at breast feeding, must now apply for a permit to keep the baby
without the mother. This requirement gives an opportunity for a
social investigation and for finding a way to keep the mother and
baby together, in the city or elsewhere, during the three months’
nursing period.”
Under the Milwaukee plan, applications for separation or for exception
from the three-months breast-feeding rule, are submitted to the
Juvenile Protective Association. A study of applications for separation
during the first eight months showed that 69 per cent of those who
applied for immediate separation were persuaded to keep their babies
and nurse them, and only 9 per cent of this group released their
children at the end of three months. It has been the experience
of the association that the appeal to the unmarried mother to nurse
her baby at least for the minimum period of three months as a kind
of reparation for having brought him into the world so handicapped
is an almost unfailing argument. It has been found also that at
the end of this period not only has there been opportunity for a
thorough social investigation but the mother has had a chance to
recover from her physical and mental strain and is more capable
of deciding what she wishes to do for her baby and for her own rehabilitation.
Meeting the physical needs of mother and baby and securing financial
support from the father are often less difficult than readjusting
the mother to life in the community and providing for the future
of the child. Here the most expert skill is required for study of
the mother’s needs and potential abilities and for wise decision
with reference to such questions as marriage, return to the mother’s
parental home, employment, placement of mother and child, adoption,
and for understanding supervision. Opinions differ greatly, even
among experienced social workers, with reference to the circumstances
under which marriage of the parents should be encouraged, the desirability
of keeping mother and child together as a permanent plan extending
beyond infancy, the policy with reference to adoptions, the extent
to which placement at housework with the baby can be adjusted to
the needs of the unmarried mother, and many other phases of the
subject.
In Philadelphia in 1921 committees of the Conference on Parenthood
worked out standards of case work with illegitimate families which
were tentatively adopted in June of the year. Recommendations under
the heading “Social Treatment” include the following:. . . .
“7. Adoptions.—The whole question of adoptions in relation
to the children of unmarried parents should receive most careful
study. No mater how great the social pressure, no child should be
adopted unless the social, medical, and mental findings indicate
that this action will best serve the interest of the child, the
parents, and the foster parents.”
Practically no facts have been compiled concerning the results
over a period of years of keeping together the unmarried mother
and her child and the methods by which satisfactory adjustments
are being made, and we have little or no information showing the
extent to which it is possible for the mother to carry the burden
of the child’s care over an extended period, nor is it known
how much the child suffers as he grows older from an unfavorable
community attitude toward the situation. The Federal Children’s
Bureau is now securing case histories from social agencies which
will, it is hoped, throw some light on these questions. Successful
case work with unmarried parents and their children requires scientific
study of individual capacities, such as that being developed by
psychiatric clinics. Community resources sufficiently flexible to
permit adaptation of treatment to individual needs are essential.
Above all, it is necessary that there be a sympathetic and understanding
approach to such problems, and infinite patience and tact in making
the delicate social adjustments which are involved.
|